quote:

Originally posted by john in brasil:
BC,

Maria would like to send you a message.

BC,

If you write to me I will forward your email to Maria so she can get in touch with you.

quote:

Originally posted by john in brasil:
BC,

If you write to me I will forward your email to Maria so she can get in touch with you.

Done!

It is no surprise that some refuse to accept the results of Fulham's research, as after all it is a matter of what you wish to believe and everyone has the right to their own opinion.

For those who ask for evidence however, I would point out the following. The reason that further corroborative evidence is highly unlikely to be published on the Internet is that it contains (in the minimal form) some 2 MB of scanned supporting documents. I know of few website forums where you can post that sort of material, even should you wish to.

Oldtimer

OT
Speaking personally, it has nothing at all to do with what I want to believe. and everything to do with WHOM I choose to believe.
Taking the word of a proven liar who has a previous history of misleading members of this forum for their own gain would not be a good place to start.
If the evidence is sound enough, it should be demonstrated, otherwise it remains nothing more than the usual hot air and empty words that normally emanate from that quarter.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: johnd,

Johnd

quote:

Taking the word of a proven liar who has a previous history of misleading members of this forum for their own gain

I have put up with your bitterness for some while, because of your evident failure on matters VDW (I hope you didn't blow all your Christmas money on New Little Bric and Sublimity).

But your remarks above are palpably untrue and defamatory. Either try to substantiate them if you feel you can, or withdraw them, apologise publicly on this forum, and never make another similar comment on this forum or anywhere else.

Or what, you may think.

Or I take action to secure your details from Gummy and institute legal action. I NEVER bluff, have I think it is fair to say a track record of success in finding those I seek, and with a son qualified as both a barrister and solicitor I have the means to take legal matters forward without the expense usually involved.

John D,

Each to his own I guess and I can understand your stance given that you haven't viewed the evidence, which for the reasons I've previously stated would be somewhat difficult to put on here.

As you are so strong on evidence, perhaps you would care to produce the specific unequivocal evidence that leads you to make this statement:

QUOTE:
"Taking the word of a proven liar who has a previous history of misleading members of this forum for their own gain would not be a good place to start."
UNQUOTE:

Should you not be willing of course, then members may draw their own conclusions as from which area "the usual hot air and empty words normally emanate."

Oldtimer

Hi John D

I know you have had your run-ins with Mtoto and Fulham, but when you speak of "that quarter" - I am surprised that you are happy to so readily lump JIB, Lee and Old Timer in with the "category" you dislike just because, on this occasion, they happen to agree with the Fulham's findings.
JIB is prone to the odd practical joke. However, Lee and Old Timer have been nothing but consistent and responsible contributors during the entire time I've been around. Perhaps you know different.

To my knowledge, no one connected with the release of the information has denigrated the material that was written - in fact, quite the reverse. I think everyone who has made any serious study of the material would agree that the writer of the letters was a person with a very high level of insight into horseracing.

Perhaps today is your day for reconsidering remarks made in your last post.

For me the revelation is a surprise and a disappointment. But I think it is very important that it has been made public for us "students". I am grateful that it has, and am quite surprised by the reaction it has prompted. Viewing the material again with this knowledge in mind will definitely help us move forward. Look how long we have all been stuck on this merry-go-round. And after all this time, how many can even attest to a 65% strike rate, let alone 80%+? Very, VERY few!! Perhaps the reason for that has just been made known.

Of course you are free to believe what you want, as are we all.

BlackCat

This message has been edited. Last edited by: BlackCat,

I think that there are bound to be many over- reactions and emotional outbursts by some, as this is akin to being told that Santa doesn't exist

My My My Yeh But----

Santa didn't cost me 50 old form books and all them booklets!

Has anybody thought to give the bad news to "investor/pro" ??



tc

Hi Imp

Take heart fine fellow - the information in the booklets is still worthwhile!

And you can use the form books as nifty paper-weights; to even up wonky chairs; to stand on when changing a light bulb; to drop on trick-or-treaters or double-glazing canvassers or JW's from an upstairs window... the list could go on and on.

Alternatively, you could sell them to an unsuspecting VDWer on e-bay or another forum, but be quick, news travels fast.

I'm glad I got my £148 back!!

BC

quote:

Originally posted by Tuppenycat:
Has anybody thought to give the bad news to "investor/pro" ??



tc

As I have stated this is a v difficult time for students of VDW. Until this situation sinks in it is a time susceptible to violent emotions, because only time can provide the grace of getting things into perspective.

VDWology has changed forever. We can no longer separate the idea from the man. Now that the man is real everything has to be reviewed.

I believe in time that this current reformation will endow the subject with the essential pluralism it needs to be a significant contribution. When properly understood I think we will see this as the event that allows the differing schools to gather under the same roof because all understand that there never was a 'pure' strain of ideology that separated one from the other.

As this is the season of goodwill why don't we take this providential opportunity of burying the hatchet?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: john in brasil,

quote:

Originally posted by Delilah:
I think that there are bound to be many over- reactions and emotional outbursts by some, as this is akin to being told that Santa doesn't exist

What do you mean "Santa doesn't exist"?

I demand to see the proof. You can't just come on here - out of the blue - and tell me Santa doesn't exist. I refuse to believe it. What evidence to you have that Santa doesn't exist? You have made it up. I've seen "Miracle on 34th Street" you know. And one night I stayed up late and I heard him put the sack at the end of my bed. What more proof do I need.

Why did you have to come on here and tell me that...
why? why? why? Delilah

quote:

Originally posted by john in brasil:
As this is the season of goodwill why don't we take this providential opportunity of burying the hatchet?

OK John, I am prepared to forgive Delilah. I shall still look out for Santas sleigh though.

quote:

Originally posted by john in brasil:
As I have stated this is a v difficult time for students of VDW. Until this situation sinks in it is a time susceptible to violent emotions, because only time can provide the grace of getting things into perspective.

VDWology has changed forever. We can no longer separate the idea from the man. Now that the man is real everything has to be reviewed.

I believe in time that this current reformation will endow the subject with the essential pluralism it needs to be a significant contribution. When properly understood I think we will see this as the event that allows the differing schools to gather under the same roof because all understand that there never was a 'pure' strain of ideology that separated one from the other.

As this is the season of goodwill why don't we take this providential opportunity of burying the hatchet?

In all sincerity, I think that is an excellent sentiment. I hope we can all agree to do so.

Delilah

Not really. What has changed?

It remains true is that the VDW correspondence (and "Systematic Betting") were the work of a single mind, extremely well versed in racing and, in particular, in how to identify probable winners.

Neither, surely, is it any real surprise that Che Van der Wheil turns out to be a pseudonym. Tony Peach's former Raceform colleague, the late Phillip Alexander (one of the "Methodmakers") wrote, without qualification, some years ago that "VDW" was a pseudonym, and of course Tony has written that people have combed the Market Harborough electoral register for Van der Wheils without success.

The only thing that recent research has really changed is in respect of the accuracy of many of the comments made about VDW's personal history - some by him but mostly by Tony Peach (eg after the Quest for Fame discussion). JIB also takes the view, which I fully share, that the available evidence suggests VDW may not have been as successful a punter as his claims suggest. Though although the evidence as to identity is beyond all doubt, the evidence as to his success as a punter is not. That is strong but circumstantial, and while JIB is very probably right, it is not absolutely certain.

So what we have is a body of work by someone whose understanding of racing is, I think, unquestioned, even by folk who disagree about how that work should be interpreted.

I would argue that we are all better off as a result of the recent information (and that was clearly JIB's intention in informing people beyond those invited to evaluate the evidence). We all now know beyond all reasonable doubt that there is no "magic" ingredient in the VDW mix - no single "key", "missing link" or magic numbers which, on its own, leads to riches. (And at times, not necessarily here, discussion of the numbers in the Erin example has been conducted as if it was the quest for the Holy Grail.)

A number of folk, two of whom have clearly demonstrated it on this very forum (Guest and Lee), have found ways of making money from VDW's work, by no means always from the same interpretation or application. (As is well documented here, Mtoto for example has a very different take on aspects of VDW than, for example, Lee, or indeed me.) But those who dismiss its potential value have never put in the hard work necessary to get to grips with it, and are incapable of offering any informed comment on it (for example Graham Wheldon of Update), or have manifestly failed as race analysts and instead rely on the intellectually flawed "value betting" approach (of which VDW was dismissive).

It is easy to draw attention to the limitations of elements of VDW's approach, and no one has done so more effectively than JIB. But VDW was always clear that one element on its own got one nowhere (just as a set of tyres or a gearbox on its own doesn't constitute a car). I have never seen a critique of VDW's approach by anyone who could be regarded as capable of passing their GCSEs in it, let alone their A levels, and everyone with whom I have come into contact who has got to at least A level finds it a moneymaker.

Incidentally, and to avoid misleading anyone, I am not suggesting that understanding the Erin numbers is not worthwhile. Merely that in itself it no more useful than any other elements of VDW's approach, and indeed to my mind rather less useful than understanding his take on form.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Hensman,

Hensman,

Yes my comment was a bit brief to be taken literally. I did mean that the "magic/mystique" of Santa may have gone, but Christmas is still here

Delilah

Indeed, and potentially on every day when there is racing!